Jack Puccini

Good at starting things, working on the finishing part.

AI, product, zero-to-one. Previously: founded Azide.

[Jack Puccini @jackpuccini_]

@moinnadeem Because technical feasibility is one of the last things that govern people's excitement

[Jack Puccini @jackpuccini_]

@thorstenball Not to be contrarian - but isn't this still quite conservative?

[Jay Chooi @chooi_jeq]

Shout out to @sebwarb1 for leading this research!

[Jack Puccini @jackpuccini_]

@kunchenguid Latent signal that isn’t easy to articulate, but easy to recognise

[Jack Puccini @jackpuccini_]

@reachmeviz @willcb I'm somewhat confident that was intentionally part of the launch plan (e.g - how many explainer posts + ppl explaining in comments etc... were there, alongside other reasons)

[Jack Puccini @jackpuccini_]

@rileybrown Helps when their servers are under presumably close to zero load…

[Jack Puccini @jackpuccini_]

@theShaneLevine Imo this kind of delayed hover makes the product feel out of sync - like it's lagging behind me.

High-frequency interactions like sidebar hover don't need animation or 'delight'

[Jack Puccini @jackpuccini_]

@gakonst holy

[Jack Puccini @jackpuccini_]

@Vtrivedy10 I feel like ‘slop’ may always be perceived as whatever the default llm writing style is, independent of the style itself.

If that’s true then it might be impossible to fix the problem ‘at the source’.

[Jack Puccini @jackpuccini_]

A better idea (if I do say so myself) is the other way around: maintain/ensure watermark compliance for companies augmenting model outputs

[Paul Graham @paulg]

Startup idea: Rephrase output to preserve the meaning while obliterating the watermarks. This might not become that big in itself, but it could make a great beachhead.

[Greg Brockman @gdb]

the bottleneck is increasingly knowing what you want

[Taelin @VictorTaelin]

(sorry for the silly post just some thoughts)

so after working with Fable 24/7 for several weeks now, I now genuinely believe that, indeed, the only and one last thing between us and AGI is erasure. I can't put in words how strong this belief is forming in me. I really believe so. not architecture, not compute, not datasets. every capability that the AI currently lacks (continual learning, infinite context, long term work, etc.) is root-caused by its inability to erase, and they will all emerge naturally from a well designed erasure centric train, just like so many capabilities emerged from the reasoning paradigm

I really wish I could do something about this but I'm not in a big lab so, meanwhile, I've been thinking in ways to patch that externally. clearly begging the AI to "remove, re-derive" does NOT work, because it has a massive bias to keeping what is there. an example from today: I spent an hour *begging* Fable to simplify Bend2's parser as much as it could, and I was paying attention to one specific function, a completely moronic backtracker that should NEVER be in a well written parser. yet, it was never removed. it was untouched, survived several cleanup turns, no matter how I prompted Fable, how much I asked it to aggressively prune the code. it is simply incapable of refactoring competently because Fable just... adds, patches, and keeps

but then, I realized: it cannot keep something it doesn't see!

so, what if I do this instead?

1. ask Fable to select some code and describe what it is *for*

2. then, a script mechanically removes that code

3. the script asks Fable to fill it again, without seeing the original

4. ...?

5. AI capable of improving long term code quality

basically I think I could perhaps compensate Fable's utter inability to erase stuff by just... deleting that stuff myself. and I then ask it to re-fill. I don't need to beg, I don't need to explain how to redesign from first principles, or meaning of erasure. I can just... literally, programmatically erase it myself. it cannot preserve stupid shit it can't see

sorry this post is as dumb as it seems, but it's not stupid if it works, right? I'm exited to try it, at least.

[Jack Puccini @jackpuccini_]

How people use technology will look very different in ten years. You can build for the conventions of the last era, or for the constraints that come from the human - like getting what you want out of your head and into the system. More here: https://t.co/tsvlPgzgxI

[Jack Puccini @jackpuccini_]

@araseb_ Both - lazy people often find more efficient ways of doing things

[Jack Puccini @jackpuccini_]

@marconoiz We really milking this trend all the way down to one word now 😭😭

[Jack Puccini @jackpuccini_]

@billgnofficial Maybe it exists and you just haven't heard about them (marketing jk….)

[Jack Puccini @jackpuccini_]

@garrytan In other words, build for the kind of outlier outcome our fund needs, not necessarily the business outcome that best serves you

....or maybe that's too cynical

[Jack Puccini @jackpuccini_]

@omarvvvr Taste

[Jack Puccini @jackpuccini_]

@Joi2James Claude can be too unnecessarily contrarian, although still better than chat on the whole. They balance each other.

[Jack Puccini @jackpuccini_]

@AlyssaUnell This is so cool 👏